The Other Mile-High Club
motherboard.vice.com
motherboard.vice.com
For example, I might misconfigure my FTP server to include my music collection, facilitating piracy. Or I might write a shopping cart that takes everyone's money and doesn't deliver their product. An "honest mistake" defense won't get you off the hook for these.
Since the law applies to everyone equally, airlines should also be responsible for their mistakes. We have laws against false advertising for good reason and if we stop enforcing them, companies will take advantage.
Clawing back money for something that's already been delivered is much much more problematic though.
And yet if the consumer makes a mistake it's a $100 change fee to fix the mistake.
Let's take your example, using airline tickets. Imagine you are the purchaser of the tickets, and I am the airline you purchased them from.
You might miss the opportunity to book another flight at a cheaper price, since you relied on my promise of a flight, and now you must rebook.
You might miss your opportunity to travel at all, or must now change your travel plans, because all of the flights are overbooked.
You might have budgeted very carefully, and purchased hotel reservations and a car rental, and now I have cancelled your flight and you cannot afford more expensive tickets because you already purchased a hotel and car, and you are over budget.
All of these are reasonable scenarios that I would have encountered traveling, if an airline refused to honor its reservation. This is why contracts have to be honored, and the penalty for breaking a contract is typically more than "you just don't have to honor your side of the contract".
Honest mistakes will indeed get you off the hook in your examples. Criminal laws have intent requirements, and honest mistakes usually don't clear the bar for criminal culpability.
Now, if the circumstances are such that the jury simply doesn't believe it was an honest mistake, rather than intentional, that's a different issue.
Most criminal laws have mental state requirements, and intent is the highest requirement that criminal laws might have. Many criminal laws do not have intent requirements -- requiring only recklessness or negligence, for instance -- and some are strict liability (requiring only that the prohibited act be done, independent of mental state.)
> and honest mistakes usually don't clear the bar for criminal culpability.
Honest, but unreasonable, mistakes can clear the bar for crimes with recklessness or negligence requirements rather than intent requirements, and honest and reasonable mistakes do so for ones that are of the strict liability type.
EDIT: Though my wife disagrees about "honest mistake" so there's that.
This vulture behaviour even extends to ruining small companies. In the UK recently I read of a company on amazon with a far lower price on a product than intended and the twitter crowd were all out demanding the company "honour" the price even though everyone knew it was an error. Amazon were of course siding with the customer but the company was saying it would put them out of business.
Unlike virtually any other business, it's really difficult to accept the excuse of fare "misprints" when in many cases airlines reprice routes several times per day, or even multiple times per hour. I'm sure that if they were able to say "oops", the number of "mistakes" would spike whenever unexpected demand was encountered.
If they have issues with employees fat fingering fares, perhaps they should review the internal controls.
They abdicated their responsibility for setting prices to let a piece of software set the prices for them instead. If the software did not set the price the way they wanted it is, ultimately, their own fault.
In a race to squeeze as much profit as possible out of the market they used dynamic pricing software and got screwed.
Key to success: Find some friends who also like to do this and who will wake you up in the middle of the night if they find a great deal (and won't complain if you reciprocate). It's hard to watch flyertalk all the time and the deals go quickly.
Hard to enforce, though, so you'd most likely have to go on the honor system.
If you don't think that's worth it - then you probably don't fall into the customer segment this is targeted toward. :)
Also, the "finders fee" model requires a ton more work. Integrating with all the 3rd party ticketing sites (kayak, orbitz, priceline), and ALL the first party ones (delta, united... etihad... cebu air... aeroflot... etc etc etc). Considering this is a side project, that quickly becomes prohibitive.
Keep an eye out there. :) Lots of good stuff coming out of Dublin lately. Shouldn't be too far from you.
That said, if something did show up; I would gladly pay that $96, or more, in an instant.
Just a data point.
I appreciate the data point, and honestly targeting people like you is probably a larger/more lucrative market. But that would require a lot more building and systems integration, and as this is just a side project, I'm not planning to expand to serve that need. Definitely appreciate the feedback though.
One of my friends about 12 years ago found round trip tickets from NYC to Egypt for $0 + taxes and fees. Fees came to about $100-$200 or so. He immediately bought 10 tickets for himself and friends. So an amazing deal, but still not free when considering taxes and fees.
I understand if you don't realise and their mistake sets you back you should get some sort of resolution.
But come off it, everyone in these groups knows when it's a pricing error.
These groups are fun, I do like them, but when some members think they are entitled to something because mistakes happen I have issue.
Companies do all sorts of bizarro price offers. Megabus offers $1 fares to encourage pre-booking. Target sells $6 shampoo for 90% off when it sits for awhile. $1.86 may be preferable to an empty chair for some reason.
Pretending to be in Denmark to score a deal is acting in bad faith... But if you offer something for sale at a bad price, that's your problem.
Legally speaking if a company posts a screaming good deal in a flyer or advertisement they have to honour the first sale, but after that may make corrections.
This has been tested in court.
Also, if you make an offer and accept a response by mail, the second the response hits the mailbox (NOT the postmark) it's considered accepted.
So if you offer to sell something, to person A who who responds via mail but sell to person B before the letter gets to you you're legally bound to make person A whole.
This too has been tested in court.
This is why you now see legalize at the bottom of flyers now which says the in store price is the valid price if disagreements pop up.
Over fifty flights have been booked so far based on the discussion in there. Oyster Chat is an extension of my flight hacking business Yore Oyster.
Happy to answer any questions about it, and anyone interested in flying cheaply is encouraged to join and contribute to make our community even more valuable.
-Jordan
“People absolutely have no qualms screwing
airlines," he said, "because they just
hate them."
It is probably true. I think the pricing mechanisms make this true - every time I get on a plane I am annoyed that there will be others on board that have paid significantly less than me, and I suspect that, Lake Woebegone style, so does everyone else on the plane.I don't know if the maths will support it, but an airline that actually charges flat fares may win enormous amounts of good will.
If the airline overcharged someone due to an error, do they give refunds?
If you accidentally buy 100000 shares of a stock when you meant to type 1000, you don't get a redo. Why should airlines be any different?
I once saw replacement electric shaver heads on sale in Rite-Aid. The price should have been $30 but they charged me $1. When I saw how it rang up, I bought another two. Can Rite-Aid demand $58 from me? How is this different?
Yes
That gets to the moral answer, which I think is what you're really asking, I honestly don't think it's that black and white. From the perspective of a business, there are two phases to this mistake, right? The first is letting them buy a ticket; the second is honoring that ticket. The first part doesn't hurt; the second hurts a lot. If I can catch that mistake before the second phase, why shouldn't I? Maybe I'll lose some customers who are genuinely upset that they couldn't take advantage of a bug in my software, but in the long run, I'm not convinced it's harmful.
Meanwhile, from a consumer standpoint, as someone who has -- many times -- bought things at a premium discount because of a bug in software (preorder costs for video games are especially vulnerable to this), each and every time I make that purchase, I'm willing to accept that if they catch it before they ship it and want to refund me the discounted purchase price, fine. I know I'm exploiting someone's mistake and I feel like that's not completely honest.
Yes?
Airlines have been held to task when people found legitimate fares and honestly purchased a ticket. This was not one of those situations.
More generous airlines and other large corporations have been known to honor the price anyway to avoid a P/R fiasco and generate goodwill. From my experience, UAL is not one of those companies. =)
I read it as a simple billing currency issue.
I don't know what point you were trying to make with you Rite Aid example, but it just makes me discount your opinion on all things moral. Did you really need that $58, or do you just like pulling one over on people?
For the record, you might. Stock exchanges retroactively break many trades as "Clearly Erroneous".
[1] http://www1.nyse.com/pdfs/CEE_Policies_Email_Submission_Guid... [2] http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/trader.aspx?id=clearlyerroneous
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-discussion/165403...
Wrote about it here --> http://impossiblehq.com/say-yes-adventure
There's a good round of links that I follow for good deals near the bottom.
Hope that helps!
United did the opposite, which is one of many reasons why no one likes flying United.